Tolley v. Brown

ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

Hon.
William T. Lawrence, Judge

The
petition of Daniel Tolley for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
WVE 16-10-0097. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr.
Tolley's habeas petition must be denied.

On
October 25, 2016, a Conduct Report was issued charging Mr.
Tolley with possession of unauthorized property in violation
of Code B-215. The Conduct Report states:

On 10/25/2016 at approximately 12:45 PM, a cell search was
conducted within EHU #206. During the performance of this
search a large amount of Unauthorized/Altered Property was
discovered. 1.) Three sets of Koss headphones with Altered
name & DOC #s[;] 2.) Various colored cards created in
Print Shop and laminated[;] 3.) “Window cover”
utilized for impairment of surveillance[;] 4.) WVCF Labor
Line Gloves[;] 5.) Casio fx-260 SOLAR calculator with
original name & DOC # scratched off then replaced with
“Tolley 174395”[;] 6.) “Fossil” watch
with all mechanical insides removed.

Dkt. No. 7 at 1.

Mr.
Tolley was notified of the charge that same day when he
received the Screening Report. He plead not guilty to the
charge. The Screening Report reflects that Mr. Tolley did not
request witnesses or physical evidence. But in his habeas
petition, Mr. Tolley asserts that the screening officer told
him he could not call staff members as witnesses, so his
requested staff witnesses were not documented on the
Screening Report and did not provide statements for the
hearing.

A
hearing was held on October 27, 2016. The Hearing Report
reflects that Mr. Tolley stated that the items were his, but
Mr. Tolley maintains that statement was taken out of context
and is incomplete. The hearing officer found Mr. Tolley
guilty based on the staff reports, Mr. Tolley's
statement, the confiscation of property form, and a
photograph of the confiscated items. The sanctions imposed
included a thirty-day earned-credit-time deprivation, which
was suspended but ultimately imposed.

Mr.
Tolley appealed to Facility Head and the IDOC Final Reviewing
Authority, both of which were denied. He then brought this
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254.

C.
Analysis

Mr.
Tolley raises three claims in his habeas petition: (1) he was
denied documentary evidence; (2) the hearing officer was not
impartial; and (3) he was denied witnesses. The respondent
maintains that Mr. Tolley's claims lack merit and, to the
extent he was denied due process, any errors were harmless.
Mr. Tolley did not file a reply brief responding to the
respondent's arguments. The Court will address Mr.
Tolley's impartial-decisionmaker claim before addressing
his other two claims together.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.
...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.